Nsw Amateur Brewing Competition

[the_new_darren]

I agree. What are these guys on?

Three points for first, two for second and one for third. The tally makes champion brewer.

Best of show is the beer with the highest score

Always has been

tnd

 

[Barley Belly]

 

[np1962]

 

[the_new_darren]

hmmm

 

[bigfridge]

hmmm

Thank you everone for your opinion - particularly those from outside NSW are greatly appreciated.

You can rant and rave all you like, but the simple fact is that each competition has its own set of rules and these rules are published in advance as part of the entry pack. If you don't like the rules then you have the option of discussing your concerns with the organising committee before entries close, or not entering at all.

It is totally unfair for all the entrants to 'change the rules after the comp' as this disadvantages those who read the rules and entered with them in mind. If it now was announced that all the entries would be counted towards an additional award of Champion Brewer people would be justifiably upset if they didn't enter as many categories as they could so that they would be in the running for this additional award.

Once again can I remind people that he best way to contact anyone from the club is to use the website - not AHB. And please remember that there are no fully trained operators waiting to take your call - there are only volunteers who need a day or two to catch up on the emails and discuss the issue before replying.

Over and out !

 

[bigfridge]

I agree. What are these guys on?

Three points for first, two for second and one for third. The tally makes champion brewer.

Best of show is the beer with the highest score

Always has been

tnd

Always ?

I don't know how many comps TND has entered, or even the old Darren for that matter - but I can probably go back 15 or so years and from my records rewarding the 'volume' of entries rather than the 'quality' is a fairly recent invention.

I just looked up the result ssheet for the 2001 Bathurst comp and there was only a prise for the Champion Kit and Champion Mash Brewer - nothing about 3, 2 or 1.

Rules is rules and they can be changed after the event !

 

[Malted]

Thank you everone for your opinion - particularly those from outside NSW are greatly appreciated.

You can rant and rave all you like, but the simple fact is that each competition has its own set of rules and these rules are published in advance as part of the entry pack. If you don't like the rules then you have the option of discussing your concerns with the organising committee before entries close, or not entering at all.

It is totally unfair for all the entrants to 'change the rules after the comp' as this disadvantages those who read the rules and entered with them in mind. If it now was announced that all the entries would be counted towards an additional award of Champion Brewer people would be justifiably upset if they didn't enter as many categories as they could so that they would be in the running for this additional award.

Once again can I remind people that he best way to contact anyone from the club is to use the website - not AHB. And please remember that there are no fully trained operators waiting to take your call - there are only volunteers who need a day or two to catch up on the emails and discuss the issue before replying.

Over and out !

We appreciate that you are appreciative of our opinions. Clearly we can see that which you can not.

You can rant and rave all you like, the fact is AABC rules were not followed, it is irrefutable. Did you follow AABC rule D10? C9 indicates it should have been followed. NSW are not 'above the law'. It was not advertised as the HUB NSW competition, it was advertised as the NSW ABC, that links it to AABC, perhaps some folks forgot that?

It is totally unfair for the judges to 'change the rules after the comp' has started finished just because they didn't read the AABC rules. If it was now announced that an extra category of Champion Brewer was introduced, why people might think the competition conformed to national standards!

Competition bombing happens; they still have to be good enough to get enough gongs; that's the idea of being a champion brewer! It's about the most number of gongs not the biggest gong (because that has it's own award). If you can win as many categories as you can, you must be good, we'll give you a champion brewer award because you're obviously so good at it and put so much time and effort into it. Reward for effort.

Fact, no Champion Brewer category was listed in the NSW ABC rules.
Fact, a Champion Brewer Category was awarded.
Fact, it was not the entrants who issued that award.
Fact, it was not the entrants who changed the NSW ABC rules.
Fact, AABC rules are that state rules should follow the AABC rules.

Is this not so?

I harbour no ill will towards you BigFridge. Please don't perpetrate excuses for mistakes, there is no valid justification for it. If I should stay out of it, then so should you.

Edit: Events and rules change over time, that is par for the course. You have to work with what is current, particulalry if it is a subsiduary of a national competition that has defined rules.

 

[yum beer]

AWARDS:​

​

​

​

​

The following awards will be given:​

​

​

​

​

First placing, and ribbons to Second and Third placing in each class.​

Up to two​

​

​

​

Highly Commended places may be awarded at the discretion of the​

judges.​

​

​

​

​

Champion Beer of show, and Runner-up​

The brewers of the Champion beers will be sponsored to enter a beer of their​

choice (could be in a different category or style) in the​

​

​

​

American Homebrewers​

Associations National Homebrew Competition.



Clearly never was an award for Champion brewer, though it does appear there should be 2 tickets for Champion Beer and runner-up.

Might I suggest a few people read the actual wording of the entry before bitching about non awarding of an award that was never on offer.

There WAS no award for Champion Brewer. Unlucky Mikk, probably would've cleaned up in most comps, but not this one.

 

[Malted]

AWARDS:​

​

​

​

​

The following awards will be given:​

​

​

​

​

First placing, and ribbons to Second and Third placing in each class.​

Up to two​

​

​

​

Highly Commended places may be awarded at the discretion of the​

judges.​

​

​

​

​

Champion Beer of show, and Runner-up​

The brewers of the Champion beers will be sponsored to enter a beer of their​

choice (could be in a different category or style) in the​

​

​

​

American Homebrewers​

Association's National Homebrew Competition.

Fact, no Champion Brewer category was listed in the NSW ABC rules.
Fact, a Champion Brewer Category was awarded.
Fact, it was not the entrants who issued that award.
Fact, it was not the entrants who changed the NSW ABC rules.
Fact, AABC rules are that state rules should follow the AABC rules.

Is this not so?

 

[dr K]

Malted is 100% correct in his statement of AABC rules, but he forgets a minor point, D.10 refers specifically to the AABC.
It may be easy for a State to simply adopt this, but is not a requirement. In the ACT for example you need at least one ale and one lager, whilst we have a Champion Brewer, our premier award is in fact Beer of Show.
Anyway, can't wait for the National's results and all the whinging and nit-picking post.
Beer is made from grain, not grape.

K

 

[manticle]

Anyway, can't wait for the National's results and all the whinging and nit-picking post.
Beer is made from grain, not grape.

Would have worked better if you had said whining.

 

[dr K]

Would have worked better if you had said whining.

I agree !!!

K

 

[Malted]

Malted is 100% correct in his statement of AABC rules, but he forgets a minor point, D.10 refers specifically to the AABC.

So what is your point?

I thought that was clear that D10 is specifically AABC.
C9 is not a minor point.

 

[Malted]

Clearly never was an award for Champion brewer, though it does appear there should be 2 tickets for Champion Beer and runner-up.

Might I suggest a few people read the actual wording of the entry before bitching about non awarding of an award that was never on offer.

There WAS no award for Champion Brewer. Unlucky Mikk, probably would've cleaned up in most comps, but not this one.

Pasted from the H.U.B website (just saw it now, it was posted today)-

Hi Michael,

Sorry for not getting back to you sooner. The club committee have been discussing the awarding of the Champion Brewer since you raised your query.
Without a clear Champion Brewer Award specified the decision was made to award the Champion Brewer to the entrant who won the Best Of Show, Sam Haldane.
The ANHC organiser have been informed and they will contact Sam.
Congratulations on your results - looks like your beers did extremely well in the competition.
Ben


So, a final determination, finally...

:huh:

 

[Malted]

It may be easy for a State to simply adopt this, but is not a requirement.

I 100% agree. So they did not have to award a Champion Brewer; so why did they backflip and do so? Pressure from a particular brewer perhaps? We can all see that this happened. It is how they chose to award it that is in question. In the abscence of their own rules they appear to have ignored the clear AABC rules for how it should be awarded.

Why are you folks all denying the truth?

 

[bum]

Why are you folks all denying the truth?

All shared a beer together, perhaps.

That'll change a bloke.

 

[manticle]

Too ******' right.

I used to be a woman.

 

[dr K]

So what is your point?

I thought that was clear that D10 is specifically AABC.
C9 is not a minor point.

Not from your previous post. You plucked two paragraphs and co-joined to support your opinion.

C9. Rules for State Qualifiers. State/Territory Qualifying Championships shall, where
possible, follow the same (relevant) rules as the AABC.

You are, of course, again perfectly correct, C9 is not a minor point (not that I said it was), C9 clearly states "where possible" and "relevant". As you point out D10 is specifically AABC....
So..whats the problem?

K
(ps glad I am not the only woman/manwo !)

 

[goomboogo]

Too ******' right.

I used to be a woman.

I still am.

 

[Malted]

Not from your previous post. You plucked two paragraphs and co-joined to support your opinion.


You are, of course, again perfectly correct, C9 is not a minor point (not that I said it was), C9 clearly states "where possible" and "relevant". As you point out D10 is specifically AABC....
So..whats the problem?

K
(ps glad I am not the only woman/manwo !)

One says these are the national rules, the other says state comps should follow national rules. Ergo, the state comp should have followed D10. Simple really.

How was it not possible or relevant to follow national rules? Relevence one might contend, is the issue since they did not list Champion Brewer as an award category, therefore it was not relevant. OK. But then they did award it, so it became relevant. Perhaps it was not possible becasue they couldn't count?

The problem is, an award that was not listed was awarded in a manner defying sense. The way in which it was awarded did not have a methodology defined by NSW ABC. It did have a methodology defined by AABC. NSW ABC as part of the national comp should have followed the AABC rules when they chose to award the non listed award that they were not obliged to award, they did not use the AABC methodology.